This is another one of those posts that I saw before Christmas, and am just now getting to it. It is all about a video from a Chicago Town Hall Meeting, featuring Al Sharpton. Here is an excerpt, and the video…

On Thursday, a town hall meeting hosted by Al Sharpton and the National Action Network to address gun violence exploded into a revolt against “Chicago Machine” politics, Mayor Rahm Emanuel, and the aldermen in City Hall, with panel and audience members calling to vote out their elected officials.

One 82-year-old preacher even called for “Tea Party” style meetings in some of Chicago’s south side communities such as Altgeld Gardens and Trumbull Park.

I really hope that this means that African Americans are waking up to the fact that the Democratic party has been completely screwing them over since the 60’s. Remember this, from LBJ?

To answer this, I think we again need to go back into history, and see what happened in the 60’s. Let’s start with some quotes attributed to LBJ.

“These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. For if we don’t move at all, then their allies will line up against us and there’ll be no way of stopping them, we’ll lose the filibuster and there’ll be no way of putting a brake on all sorts of wild legislation. It’ll be Reconstruction all over again.”

LBJ, Democratic President of the United States.

“I’ll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”

Lyndon B. Johnson to two governors on Air Force One according Ronald Kessler’s Book, “Inside The White House”

Seems that folks are getting tired of, Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. Perhaps all of our citizens deserve the same consideration, and not more relabeled democratic party segregation, eugenics, Jim Crow, and lies?

I can’t tell you how many times that I’ve read blogs, from both ends of the spectrum, that talk about African-Americans as if they are a monolithic voting bloc that will ALWAYS vote Democrat. We’ve all seen the videos of African Americans thinking that Obama will pay their mortgages, or that they are going to get “Obama Money,” from his “stash.” Since these are well-publicized cases, they are influencing our perceptions about an entire group of people. So, the question is, is that all true?

And, if is it really that way, will it change? You see, I question both of those assumptions. While the voting issue is true, what is the basis for it? History tells us that that after the civil war, most African-Americans were Republicans, and the first African American Congressmen from the south belonged to the GOP. We also know that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was a Republican. It is also true that Democrats were responsible for the Jim Crow laws, and that the southern Democrats resisted the civil rights era legislation vehemently. So, that leaves us with something that bears examining; why did African Americans switch to voting over 90% Democrat in every election?

To answer this, I think we again need to go back into history, and see what happened in the 60’s. Let’s start with some quotes attributed to LBJ.

“These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. For if we don’t move at all, then their allies will line up against us and there’ll be no way of stopping them, we’ll lose the filibuster and there’ll be no way of putting a brake on all sorts of wild legislation. It’ll be Reconstruction all over again.”

LBJ, Democratic President of the United States.

“I’ll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”

Lyndon B. Johnson to two governors on Air Force One according Ronald Kessler’s Book, “Inside The White House”

Those two quotes from LBJ are rather telling. For me, they point to a deception of action, as well as a deception of intent. Clearly, LBJ was suggesting that he could win the African American vote by making some promises, and delivering little…”just enough.”.

Obviously, these two quotes have been floating around for a long time, and many are going to suggest that they were never said at all. But, let’s take a look at what has happened, and see if what LBJ said has come to pass. After all, people can say many things, but it’s their actions that show their true intent.

Let’s take a look at some examples…

Welfare and the breakdown of the family:

The various welfare programs of the 1960’s had a tremendous impact on the African American family. Not long after the creation of these programs, the rates of fatherless families began to rise. They have continued to rise for decades, and now, over 70% of African American children grow up without a father living in the home. That was not the case prior to welfare, and the programs have been identified as the cause for this. As well all know, children raised in fatherless homes are many times more likely to have lower educational achievement, use drugs, and engage in other criminal activities. However, what has been done to correct it? Has the intervention of the government really made it better…or worse?

Or, was it, “…we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

Education:

It is also well know that the educational system has failed our children. We also know that minority children suffer even more.

Now, we’ve seen successful alternatives, but “progressives” in the unions attack these, and when President Obama was elected, he shut down the DC waiver program, which greatly benefited mostly poor, African American kids.

Instead, the government makes many promises, and insists on spending more money on the same failed system. Essentially, they end up purchasing more failure.

Or, is it, “…we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

The U.S. Labor Department reported on Friday that unemployment for African Americans increased to 16.3% in August 2010 from 15.6% in July 2010. The percentage point increase was greater than it was for Whites and Hispanics. Overall unemployment climbed to 9.6% for the month of August from the July unemployment rate of 9.5%.

So, the unemployment rate is higher for African Americans as well. Of course, President Obama has promised to focus on this, but he has delivered nothing.

Or, is it, “…we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

As you look at this, it is easy to conclude that not only has government action/programs made the situation worse, but they also seem intent on keeping it the same. I would hypothesize that there is a reason for this: If government can keep any group dependent, they can then extract support from that group. They create a circumstance in which a large segment of the population is keep poor and undereducated, effectively preventing that group from escaping poverty. Then, every election cycle, the Democrats come foreword and tell that group that the other party wants to kill them, jail them, and take away all of their benefits. By combining dependency, poverty, illiteracy, and hate, they can convince a group to vote for them every time.

In essence, I believe that the Democrats have intentionally acted in a way to “Cloward-Piven” a large segment of the African American community, by making them dependent on government assistance, and placing roadblocks for individuals in that community to be successful. After all, a person may want to succeed, but if they can’t get an education that provided even the most basic of skills, and they are penalized for any positive effort by a prohibitive loss of benefits, will that person eventually give up and not even try? And, what happens to that population of people after generations of the same? I think we can project the answer to that. As I suggested in the post, “Why Hope can Kill the Progressive Agenda,” people trapped in hopelessness for generations forget that there is any hope at all. In fact, we see the results of these policies on a tragically regular basis.

This is racist. Not the bed sheet wearing, ignorant redneck variety, but the soft racism of the nanny state and elites. Through all of this, I think the Democratic Party is just a racist as they always were. They simple present it differently (remember “calling it something else?”). They don’t believe that the African American can succeed, so they are content to “manage” him. Why provide good education if they can’t do well anyway? Why present opportunity and freedom when they don’t believe that the African American can use those to their own advantage? Just build housing, send in food stamps, and have horrifically inadequate schools, and leave them to poverty. Through the decades, it’s what they have done.

You know, “…we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

So, I think the phrase “government plantation” is a completely accurate representation of the current relationship between our elitist government and the African American community. When you look at the totality of the problem, their actions show their true beliefs. In fact, the evidence becomes over whelming.

It seems like an insurmountable challenge, but I believe that there is incredible untapped human potential in the African American community. I say this because when good educational choices are available, African American children excel, just like any other group. Their scores rise to rival anyone’s, and all the negative outcomes start to decrease. So, it is safe to say that real education reform (ending government intrusion, union domination, and instituting real local control) would be the final nail in the coffin for the soft racist policies of the elitist left.

However, it wouldn’t end there. There are millions of people of all races that are caught in the poor education-poverty-crime-hopeless trap. To help them, or in some cases, encourage them, to escape, we’d also have to do a phase-down on the nanny state. Benefits would have to be restructured, yet again, to encourage success, and not penalize it. Caps and limits would need to be imposed to put an end to system-induced inter-generational dependency. That would be a difficult sell, but so worth it in the end.

The total effort would take nearly a generation to see tangible results, as it would take that long to begin reform, and educate a full generation of children. Once accomplished, however, the US would see a economic and cultural renaissance. As African-Americans, Hispanics, and other groups take their rightful place in our society, the US would be transformed. This would not be the “fundamental” government-forced change, but an organic one; based on ideas, innovations, merit, and creativity. Everyone would truly be able to advance to the limits of their own talents, skills, and persistence. We would cease to be a “hyphenated” society, as we would all be peers-truly equal in our opportunity, and respectful of the accomplishments of our fellow Americans.

Does this mean that the African American vote is going to swing to the side of freedom? Probably not, but the fact that more and more seem to be waking up is an encouraging sign. Hopefully, over time, more and more will embrace freedom, and their own personal power. And once they do, their lives will improve, and as a result, America will improve.

I have argued for the past couple of days that Live Action’s videos set up artificial situations that are intended to stoke outrage and grab media attention. It’s my opinion that the reason that the video stings focus on charges of racism, sex abuse and sex trafficking is that these are the most incendiary sorts of charges that can be put up on a video screen. Matt seems to think that these charges are fully justified, and that, as a result, the Live Action videos are a reliable guide to the truth as regards Planned Parenthood.

Again, if one submits that that this is an artificial situation, why do the workers cooperate with them so freely? I have presented the idea that this is no different that a drug sting. And if we are to follow his logic, we must release every drug dealer that was caught in an undercover buy. And, while we are at it, we should also release every car thief that was caught in a sting. You see, police leave vehicles around for car thieves to steal. When the thief tries to hot-wire it, the windows go up, the doors lock, and the police move it. And, it’s all on video. Since it is an artificial situation, we must assume that in real life, car thieves don’t really steal cars.

On the other hand, I do find contentions like the ones on the video silly. On a common-sense level, it seems pretty clear to me that Planned Parenthood is full of politically-correct, pro-affirmative action, anti-racist liberals. It also seems pretty clear to me that if there are any old-school man-hating “sisterhood is powerful” feminists left, they are likely to be working at places like Planned Parenthood. This means that the contention that the organization supports sex trafficking and sexual abuse of minors — two issues of major importance to feminist theorists and activists — is also pretty silly. These videos just don’t seem to pass the common-sense test. In fact, they fail it in a rather spectacular fashion.

One cannot claim to correct “assumptions” with other assumptions. For example, if the Planned Parenthood workers were so aligned with the feminist movement, why did they not IMMEDIATELY try to save their fellow womyn from the grasp of these “evil” men? If you want to assume that a set of workers subscribe to a political philosophy, should we also not assume that they actually follow that philosophy, particularly when the law is in accordance with that philosophy? Additionally, is Mr. Dominguez suggesting that Planned Parenthood never sees children that have been, or are being abused? Is he suggesting that this simply does not happen? Apparently so, because he asserts that the Planned Parenthood staff people do not know how to deal with it. Given the bulk of people “served” by Planned Parenthood in any given year, should there not be a certain percentage of underage patients that are being abused? Or does that simply not happen? Has Planned Parenthood EVER made a report? And if so, why didn’t they in these situations?

I’ll venture these explanations: (1) Margaret Sanger was no more racist, and probably a good deal less racist, than most of her contemporaries. (2) Her advocacy of birth control and sex education came mostly from her concern for women, not out of hatred of minority groups. (3) The reason that PP clinics are in low-income minority neighborhoods is that women in upper-income neighborhoods don’t need to go to Planned Parenthood to get any of its services — and also because no one wants a Planned Parenthood clinic in the neighborhood, and people in low-income neighborhoods are not in a position to dictate who locates in their neighborhood.

And (4) the reason that the counselors did not immediately report what the 13 year-old girl said about her overaged “lover” was because the girl herself did not seem to want to report it. In almost any situation that involves sex, confidentiality is a fundamental commitment for care providers, and that sometimes leads to complex situations in which the strands of legal and moral obligation point in different directions. Did the counselor have a legal obligation to report? Yes, she did. No dispute there. Do medical professionals sometimes have obligations that conflict with their legal obligations? Well, that’s harder to say, but I’d venture that the answer is yes to that one, too. Did the counselor make a legally defensible decision? No. Does this mean that Planned Parenthood “supports” sexual abuse of minors? Looks to me like that statment requires a gigantic leap of logic that is not justified by the facts, so no.

Again, if it were one case, it wouldn’t be an issue. It would be one staff that failed to report, and would likely be terminated for that omission. However, I only showed two videos in my post. There were many more. In each case, the worker freely volunteered instructions on how to evade an investigation. This was not a case where the worker listened and merely didn’t make a report. Instead, the worker assisted the undercover teen in how to evade an investigation. That, my friends, is the line between simple negligence, and aiding and abetting. This wasn’t letting something slide, this was actively assisting in the cover-up of what the worker thought was a crime! Let’s not forget that while the teens were “fake,” the workers did not know this. Again, given the number of cases, all in different locations, when can we say there is a pattern? How many would it take? 10, 50, 100??

As for the statement that medical professionals may have obligations that interfere with their legal obligations, I have to submit that patient safety is always, without exception, the primary concern of any medical professional. The law reflects that. There is no legal excuse, none whatsoever, to not make a report of child abuse. There is no room for equivocation. It matters not if the victim does not want a report made. The legal and safety obligations of the medical staff override any victim preference. In fact, the victim, not having the emotional maturity to know that they are being victimized, have likely been “groomed” into accepting their role in what they think is a “love” relationship. The truth is that they are being victimized…by an adult that has thoroughly manipulated them. And again, he is suggesting that violating the law, as well as medical ethics, in multiple locations, is a non-issue?

(Moreover, we have no idea whether the counselors discussed the situation with their own supervisors, made any sort of report on their own, or changed their policy after dealing with this “hard case.”)

Why haven’t they said so? A press release would be appropriate. Or, did they not do it at all?

As for Margaret Sanger, she was involved in the eugenics movement. Her work and ideas were well know in England and Germany. She did discuss racial hygiene, and she did propose the extermination of the African race via her “Negro Project.” I have a hard time going with her concern for women when she spoke out so much for racial purity. But let’s not take my word for it; let’s hear more from her…

“The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”

Margaret Sanger (editor). The Woman Rebel, Volume I, Number 1. Reprinted in Woman and the New Race. New York: Brentanos Publishers, 1922.

“We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

While Mr. Dominguez tries to explain away the case against the fact that Planned Parenthood’s facilities are predominantly in minority communities, he does fail to address the fact that over 35% of all abortions are performed on African Americans, and that is far over their percentage of the overall population. Additionally, if one adds abortions to death statistics, it becomes the third leading cause of death for African Americans. So, Margaret Sanger proposes the genocide of Africans. She founds Planned Parenthood. Then, that organization (in part) provides a disproportionate percentage of abortions on African Americans. But, Mr. Dominguez would have us to believe that this is a complete co-incidence.

But, there is, as always, more. Sanger is not the only person that wanted to use “family planning” as a means to manage certain populations. In 2009, the NY Times interviewed Ruth Bader Ginsberg, then, still a Justice on the Supreme Court. Here is an excerpt…

The WND story is linked here, and the NY Slimes piece here. I’ve included a longer quote so no one can say that it was taken out of context.

The 16-year veteran of the high court was asked if she were a lawyer again, what would she “want to accomplish as a future feminist legal agenda.”

Ginsburg responded:

Reproductive choice has to be straightened out. There will never be a woman of means without choice anymore. That just seems to me so obvious. The states that had changed their abortion laws before Roe [to make abortion legal] are not going to change back. So we have a policy that affects only poor women, and it can never be otherwise, and I don’t know why this hasn’t been said more often.

Question: Are you talking about the distances women have to travel because in parts of the country, abortion is essentially unavailable, because there are so few doctors and clinics that do the procedure? And also, the lack of Medicaid for abortions for poor women?

Ginsburg: Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. [Harris v. McRae – in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.] Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn’t really want them. But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong. (Emphasis added)

You see, even members of the Supreme Court thought that abortion, and particularly, publicly funded abortions, were a means to eliminate “populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”

And who exactly is being aborted in numbers almost double their percentage of population?

If we listen to Mr. Dominguez, that’s yet another coincidence to be explained away.
Well, there you have it. The readers can decide who is correct.

I do have to compliment Mr. Dominguez, he was civil during this debate, which makes him a rare exception to the norm. Now, however, there are more important things to cover, so back to work.

The Crispus Attucks Tea Party will hold its inaugural meeting on January 18th, 2011 at “This Is It” Soul Food Restaurant, located at 2712 Blodgett, in the heart of Houston’s 3rd Ward. Supporting “This Is It” and enjoy a buffet dinner at 5:30 pm and socialize with other guests. The meeting will begin sharply at 6:30. Guest speakers will include recently elected Texas State House Representative James Earl White, House District 12 and Anita MonCrief, National Spokesperson for AmericanMajority.com. Ms. MonCrief will be working in Houston to help the Crispus Attucks Tea Party identify and prepare Conservative candidates for upcoming elections. Representative White was recently selected by Constituents of Angelina, San Jacinto, Trinity and Tyler Counties to represent them in Texas House District 12. House District 12 is located in East Texas which was a Ku Klux Klan territory and is a predominately White House District. Texas is especially proud of the fact that Representative White’s character and the content of his message carried the day and with Tea Party help he won his seat with a substantial margin. Texas continues to lead the way for all other states in many ways. Texas and America are entering a period where “Content and Character are indeed more important than Color”.

This inaugural meeting will be a celebration of Dr. Martin Luther King’s birthday and his leadership. It will also be a celebration of all of those who blazed trails for other Americans and especially for those who have advanced the full assimilation and liberty of the descendants of America’s Black slaves. America is entering a period in time where “Content and Character are indeed more important than Color” for those who prepare themselves to be competitive. That too is worth celebrating.

Our primary objective is to break the cycles of dependency and decay that continue to anesthetize and hold captive too many Black families and neighborhoods. We provide continuing series of speakers, seminars, training and practical business support services designed to help Blacks fully assimilate into and be competitive in American society. Our objective is to teach all Americans the fullness of the history of Blacks in America and to help Blacks gain control of their lives and the destiny of their children. Only by understanding our full and true history will we all of America be liberated.

Lessons learned from decades of intrusive Social Engineering, Social Justice Policies and the Welfare State are left out of text books and routinely ignored by those profiting from them, however, they cannot be denied. One need only take a walk through what is left of our Black communities. Houston’s “Sugar Hill” became 3rd Ward which was a thriving Black enterprise zone without any government programs or subsidies. Enter stage left, “The Great Society” which offered “An FDR Chicken In Every Pot” and “An LBJ Check In Every Mail Box”. Now Houston’s 3rd Ward looks like a war zone and Black families are almost extinct. Spawned in the ’60?s, these social engineering experiments, government programs and the arrogant utopian value systems which produced them, continue to produce urban decay, increasing cyclical welfare dependency, increasing tax burdens (for those who pay taxes), the demise of the Black family, fatherless homes, skyrocketing out of wedlock births, more abortions than births, a rise in Black militancy and separatist activity and theft of real political power from all of those living in Black neighborhoods.

Neither political party has been intellectually honest with itself or Blacks. The Crispus Attucks Tea Party unleashes the anesthetized political giant rendered helpless by an unending stream of government programs funded by tax dollars. Programs, welfare checks and the demise of pride and the work ethic have robbed Blacks of their identities and their dignity. They have devastated Black neighborhoods and rendered them politically and economically impotent. The Crispus Attucks Tea Party will shift political power away from race bating politicians, games of ‘Three Card Monty” played by highly skilled political operators and race hustlers who base all political activities and campaigns on race. Operating within Black districts these charlatans have proven incapable of acting in the best interest of those they claim to represent.

The Crispus Attucks Tea Party is part of America’s rapidly growing Tea Party movement. Starting with Houston’s 3rd Ward, it will focus all of the power amassed across America by the Tea Party movement directly into targeted Black neighborhoods across America. Yes !! .. Our army operates .. “Inside The Belly Of The Beast”. The Crispus Attucks Tea Party is a non-partisan, neighborhood movement. It provides a base of operations for the descendants of Black Slavery who realize that welfare checks and government dependency are key elements of their destruction. The corresponding destructive cycles have destroyed lives, families and their neighborhoods. Government dependency holds Blacks hostage. It precludes true liberty and forever blocks full assimilation. Our mission includes building series of strong neighborhood operating bases made of business people, elected officials, Constituents and Voters, living and working in “hostile areas”. Intellectually honest Constituents living in Black neighborhoods want them to be safe and to thrive while becoming less dependent on the tax dollars of others. These Constituents want disciplined classrooms and globally competitive educations for their children. They want full control of the schools, stores, businesses within their neighborhoods and real futures for their children. These things will come only when Constituents living in these neighborhoods feel that they are worthy of them. The Crispus Attucks Tea Party will help Blacks take those steps forward. The Tea Party moves .. “Into The Belly Of The Beast”.

The Crispus Attucks Tea Party promotes and fights for the founding principles originally defined by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Our core principles include personal responsibility, education, a constrained and transparent government, a balanced budget, self sufficiency, full assimilation and the development of viable Black businesses …. that create jobs. We identify & vet viable Conservative candidates that are willing to fight for our mission, our principles and the issues we embrace. Candidates and elected officials who are commitment to American, want to maximize the value American Citizenship, share our values and demonstrate full support of our issue oriented efforts are welcome to support them. For more information on our inaugural meeting or the Crispus Attucks Tea Party, please send inquiries to info@CrispusAttucks.com.

This is a FANTASTIC development. I missed it before it started, but I will certainly be paying attention.

I know, some are already saying, “Why a ‘black’ Tea Party? Aren’t the Tea Parties inclusive?” That is true, but I think these folks are concentrating on a single community; one that has disproportionately suffered under “progressive” policies. So, I am not terribly concerned, and believe that as long as we share common ideas, we’re going to come together in the end. Additionally, if this group can gain traction, we will combine to become a much stronger political force for change. I say that we should support our fellow citizens, and we will all benefit together.

I can’t tell you how many times that I’ve read blogs, from both ends of the spectrum, that talk about African-Americans as if they are a monolithic voting bloc that will ALWAYS vote Democrat. We’ve all seen the videos of African Americans thinking that Obama will pay their mortgages, or that they are going to get “Obama Money,” from his “stash.” Since these are well-publicized cases, they are influencing our perceptions about an entire group of people. So, the question is, is that all true?

And, if is it really that way, will it change? You see, I question both of those assumptions. While the voting issue is true, what is the basis for it? History tells us that that after the civil war, most African-Americans were Republicans, and the first African American Congressmen from the south belonged to the GOP. We also know that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was a Republican. It is also true that Democrats were responsible for the Jim Crow laws, and that the southern Democrats resisted the civil rights era legislation vehemently. So, that leaves us with something that bears examining; why did African Americans switch to voting over 90% Democrat in every election?

To answer this, I think we again need to go back into history, and see what happened in the 60’s. Let’s start with some quotes attributed to LBJ.

“These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. For if we don’t move at all, then their allies will line up against us and there’ll be no way of stopping them, we’ll lose the filibuster and there’ll be no way of putting a brake on all sorts of wild legislation. It’ll be Reconstruction all over again.”

LBJ, Democratic President of the United States.

“I’ll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”

Lyndon B. Johnson to two governors on Air Force One according Ronald Kessler’s Book, “Inside The White House”

Those two quotes from LBJ are rather telling. For me, they point to a deception of action, as well as a deception of intent. Clearly, LBJ was suggesting that he could win the African American vote by making some promises, and delivering little…”just enough.”.

Obviously, these two quotes have been floating around for a long time, and many are going to suggest that they were never said at all. But, let’s take a look at what has happened, and see if what LBJ said has come to pass. After all, people can say many things, but it’s their actions that show their true intent.

Let’s take a look at some examples…

Welfare and the breakdown of the family:

The various welfare programs of the 1960’s had a tremendous impact on the African American family. Not long after the creation of these programs, the rates of fatherless families began to rise. They have continued to rise for decades, and now, over 70% of African American children grow up without a father living in the home. That was not the case prior to welfare, and the programs have been identified as the cause for this. As well all know, children raised in fatherless homes are many times more likely to have lower educational achievement, use drugs, and engage in other criminal activities. However, what has been done to correct it? Has the intervention of the government really made it better…or worse?

Or, was it, “…we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

Education:

It is also well know that the educational system has failed our children. We also know that minority children suffer even more.

Now, we’ve seen successful alternatives, but “progressives” in the unions attack these, and when President Obama was elected, he shut down the DC waiver program, which greatly benefited mostly poor, African American kids.

Instead, the government makes many promises, and insists on spending more money on the same failed system. Essentially, they end up purchasing more failure.

Or, is it, “…we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

The U.S. Labor Department reported on Friday that unemployment for African Americans increased to 16.3% in August 2010 from 15.6% in July 2010. The percentage point increase was greater than it was for Whites and Hispanics. Overall unemployment climbed to 9.6% for the month of August from the July unemployment rate of 9.5%.

So, the unemployment rate is higher for African Americans as well. Of course, President Obama has promised to focus on this, but he has delivered nothing.

Or, is it, “…we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

As you look at this, it is easy to conclude that not only has government action/programs made the situation worse, but they also seem intent on keeping it the same. I would hypothesize that there is a reason for this: If government can keep any group dependent, they can then extract support from that group. They create a circumstance in which a large segment of the population is keep poor and undereducated, effectively preventing that group from escaping poverty. Then, every election cycle, the Democrats come foreword and tell that group that the other party wants to kill them, jail them, and take away all of their benefits. By combining dependency, poverty, illiteracy, and hate, they can convince a group to vote for them every time.

In essence, I believe that the Democrats have intentionally acted in a way to “Cloward-Piven” a large segment of the African American community, by making them dependent on government assistance, and placing roadblocks for individuals in that community to be successful. After all, a person may want to succeed, but if they can’t get an education that provided even the most basic of skills, and they are penalized for any positive effort by a prohibitive loss of benefits, will that person eventually give up and not even try? And, what happens to that population of people after generations of the same? I think we can project the answer to that. As I suggested in the post, “Why Hope can Kill the Progressive Agenda,” people trapped in hopelessness for generations forget that there is any hope at all. In fact, we see the results of these policies on a tragically regular basis.

This is racist. Not the bed sheet wearing, ignorant redneck variety, but the soft racism of the nanny state and elites. Through all of this, I think the Democratic Party is just a racist as they always were. They simple present it differently (remember “calling it something else?”). They don’t believe that the African American can succeed, so they are content to “manage” him. Why provide good education if they can’t do well anyway? Why present opportunity and freedom when they don’t believe that the African American can use those to their own advantage? Just build housing, send in food stamps, and have horrifically inadequate schools, and leave them to poverty. Through the decades, it’s what they have done.

You know, “…we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

So, I think the phrase “government plantation” is a completely accurate representation of the current relationship between our elitist government and the African American community. When you look at the totality of the problem, their actions show their true beliefs. In fact, the evidence becomes over whelming.

It seems like an insurmountable challenge, but I believe that there is incredible untapped human potential in the African American community. I say this because when good educational choices are available, African American children excel, just like any other group. Their scores rise to rival anyone’s, and all the negative outcomes start to decrease. So, it is safe to say that real education reform (ending government intrusion, union domination, and instituting real local control) would be the final nail in the coffin for the soft racist policies of the elitist left.

However, it wouldn’t end there. There are millions of people of all races that are caught in the poor education-poverty-crime-hopeless trap. To help them, or in some cases, encourage them, to escape, we’d also have to do a phase-down on the nanny state. Benefits would have to be restructured, yet again, to encourage success, and not penalize it. Caps and limits would need to be imposed to put an end to system-induced inter-generational dependency. That would be a difficult sell, but so worth it in the end.

The total effort would take nearly a generation to see tangible results, as it would take that long to begin reform, and educate a full generation of children. Once accomplished, however, the US would see a economic and cultural renaissance. As African-Americans, Hispanics, and other groups take their rightful place in our society, the US would be transformed. This would not be the “fundamental” government-forced change, but an organic one; based on ideas, innovations, merit, and creativity. Everyone would truly be able to advance to the limits of their own talents, skills, and persistence. We would cease to be a “hyphenated” society, as we would all be peers-truly equal in our opportunity, and respectful of the accomplishments of our fellow Americans.

Well folks, we said it was only going to get worse. The lies, the false allegations, and the crazy rhetoric have all gone off the scale into the moonbat zone. For the latest, we have to take a look at shenanigans from the NAACP.

The NAACP States…(GASP)…That the Tea Parties are Racists!

When all else fails, go back to the old narrative? Apparently, the NAACP thinks so. While the MSM, lefty bloggers, Soros’s army of Astroturf, and a host of others all failed miserably at this, the NAACP seems willing to go back to that empty well one last time. Of course, I would be remiss if I didn’t remind everyone that this report comes out just before a midterm. Isn’t that convenient?

But, as usual, I think there is another angle to this. Yes, it’s a smear, and it’s a distraction, but it’s also a firewall of sorts. I believe that they left wants African Americans to stay as far away from the Tea Parties as humanly possible. Using the racist bogeyman is a great way to do that.

Here are some facts: There are African Americans at the Tea Parties, and they are warmly welcomed. Additionally, there are many African American speakers at the Tea Party events, and they too, are warmly received. While I can’t speak for the entire movement, being leaderless and all, I can say for myself that I would love to see more. We need all Americans to embrace their natural rights, and take up the fight against the nanny state.

I had been thinking along these lines for a long time, not just about the Tea Parties either, but what really crystallized this for me was some of the responses to Glenn Beck’s shows about Black Conservatives, and African American Founding Fathers. Many African Americans in the audiences for the Founders shows were stunned; you could see it on their faces. Several said that they didn’t know about the important role that Americans of ALL races played in the founding. They wondered why they hadn’t been taught about these people. That, my friends, is cognitive dissonance-that uncomfortable feeling one has when dogma runs face first into that wall we like to call reality. When that collision occurs, people start to question what they’ve been told, and what they believe. Needless, to say, the left doesn’t want people doing that.

And it is reality that the left wants African Americans to avoid. Because if African Americans rise up and shake off the nanny state-not as African Americans, but as unhyphenated citizens, they won’t need the left, or the NAACP, to do it. They can use their own talents and skills, and they’ll do just fine. Equality would occur, because it would be reality in practice, not imagination reflected in rhetoric. Just think of what we could do together? What obstacles could we overcome? It could be a beautiful thing. That, and we’d be unstoppable.

And that is what the NAACP, or any other leftist group, would lie, cheat, or steal, to prevent.

The laughter you hear from the cheap seats in hell is from Margaret Sanger.

According to the CDC, abortion kills more African Americans that the highest seven causes COMBINED! For details, here is some information from CNS News.

Abortion killed at least 203,991 blacks in the 36 states and two cities (New York City and the District of Columbia) that reported abortions by race in 2005, according to the CDC. During that same year, according to the CDC, a total of 198,385 blacks nationwide died from heart disease, cancer, strokes, accidents, diabetes, homicide, and chronic lower respiratory diseases combined. These were the seven leading causes of death for black Americans that year.

A total of 49 jurisdictions reported their abortion numbers for 2005 to the CDC. These included all 50 states–except California, Louisiana, and New Hampshire–and New York City and the District of Columbia. Of these 49 jurisdiction, only 36 states plus New York City and the District of Columbia reported the number of abortions by race.

Of these 36 states, Georgia reported the largest number of abortions–18,325–among African Americans. Idaho and Montana reported the fewest, 16 and 17 respectively.

I have written about this topic on two different occasions. Once article included a citation from a NY Times in which Ruth Bader Ginsberg, as sitting Supreme Court Justice, discussed abortion as a way to deal with “people we don’t want to have too many of.” Here’s the full quote…

Question: Are you talking about the distances women have to travel because in parts of the country, abortion is essentially unavailable, because there are so few doctors and clinics that do the procedure? And also, the lack of Medicaid for abortions for poor women?

Ginsburg: Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. [Harris v. McRae – in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.] Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn’t really want them. But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong. (Emphasis added)

So, we have a very powerful public official stating that abortion was meant to reduce populations in a groups that they apparently see as less worthy.

To look at the history of the problem, let’s take a look at Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, and a prominent progressive of her time. Here are some quotes from Sanger…

“We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

So, here is a progressive that founded an organization that had the stated intent to reduce populations that were perceived as undesirable. People of African descent were clearly one group targeted. Here is a video covering Margaret Sanger.

And what about now? What is Planned Parenthood up to?

One of the claims that the first video makes is that 80% of Planned Parenthood facilities are in communities with large African American populations. Could it be that Planned Parenthood, in spite of their many denials, and their efforts to “scrub” Sanger’s history, are continuing their original mission? I’ll leave that to the reader. The words of Sanger and resulting actions of Planned Parenthood are far more effective than any argument I can make.

To sum this up, I’ll go back to the original CNS article.

When asked to comment on this report, Dr. Freda Bush, an obstetrician and gynecologist in private practice in Jackson, Miss., told CNSNews.com that she found the explanation for the high rate of black abortions “disingenuous.”

“I would just like for them to explain why there’s such a significant proportion of their clinics that are located in minority communities,” said Bush, who is black. “So if you’ll notice, I did not mention that as a factor when I talked to you [earlier], so I was not accusing them of anything.

“I was just pointing out the fact that we have more, but since they brought it up, I would like for them to explain where their clinics are located, and why their clinics are located in that area,” she added.

“I would also like for an explanation of why their founder, Margaret Sanger, who was a known eugenist, also had a Negro project, and an explanation if that was not directed at the ‘undesirables,’” said Bush. “So, I’m not accusing them of anything. I would just like an explanation for the practices that they have continued.”

Dr. Alveda King, niece of slain civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., is a pro-life activist. In August 2007 she told a meeting of Priests for Life that abortionists “plant their killing centers in minority neighborhoods and prey upon women who think they have no hope.”

“The great irony,” she said, “is that abortion has done what the Klan only dreamed of.”

I have often made the point that the left is engaging in the racism that they accuse the right of harboring. This matches the classic leftist strategy of accusing the opposition of doing what they themselves are up to their ears in.

Here is why I say that. All of the left’s policies regarding race have the central assumption that minority groups are unable to succeed on their own, and require government assistance to get by in life. According to the left, minorities apparently cannot get into college on their own, and need lowered standards to do so. The left must also think that they need special laws to get jobs, and they need to threaten and extort companies into hiring otherwise qualified minority candidates. We can see the results of those policies in almost any American city. Crime, out of wedlock births, broken families, drugs, terrible schools, and so on, have all increased as result of these interventions. After decades of the programs, and their tragic results, one has to ask, who are the racists?

Resistance

Feed Your Mind

Tip Jar: Help Keep the CH 2.0 Going!

Ads by Google

NewsMax

Suscribe to our Email Newsletter!

Subscribe to our mailing list

CH 2.0 Search

Larwyn’s Linx

BadBlue Should be Your Aggregator of Choice

Amazon

>

The Conservative Hideout is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com.